I mean seriously, Borat, did you honestly think I'd have juxtaposed "affluent" and "immigrant" together in a sentence conveying anything *other* than levity?

Yankee go home ...

Goose Creek SC

Username hidden
(1690 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

"That's right E_R, I am elated, and incredibly thrilled that despite your anger, acrimony and resentfulness towards those so called "Illegals" ..."

See, this is why people to whom English is in fact not their native or first language should not attempt to engage in dialogue via the written word: sarcasm is completely lost on them.

It's like attempting to explain logic and reason to Borat.

Goose Creek SC

Username hidden
(1690 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

youtube*com/watch?v=ojm1Xzwlc9Q

Goose Creek SC

Username hidden
(1690 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

I don't understand why you don't hold this up as proof that the system works, DebJack? That's your usual crow when discussing the legal system. I mean, this poor judge was obviously wronged by these snotty affluent immigrants who deserve little more than to be dispossessed of all the wealth they've stolen from *real* Americans, bankrupted, and expatriated back to their motherland, chop chop. Numbah one asian dry clenahs no good, how you get that so clean? Ancient Chinese secret!

Goose Creek SC

Username hidden
(1690 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

What are you doing in the political forums Wayne?

Rochester NY

Username hidden
(10346 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

This article was in my local paper today. That judge is a complete asshole!

Wayne

Coral Springs FL

Username hidden
(1477 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

Updated: 2:33 p.m. CT May 3, 2007 WASHINGTON - The Chungs, immigrants from South Korea, realized their American dream when they opened their dry-cleaning business seven years ago in the nation's capital.

For the past two years, however, they've been dealing with the nightmare of litigation: a $65 million lawsuit over a pair of missing pants.

Jin Nam Chung, Ki Chung and their son, Soo Chung, are so disheartened that they're considering moving back to Seoul, said their attorney, Chris Manning, who spoke on their behalf.

"They're out a lot of money, but more importantly, incredibly disenchanted with the system," Manning said. "This has destroyed their lives."

The lawsuit was filed by a District of Columbia administrative hearings judge, Roy Pearson, who has been representing himself in the case.

Pearson said he could not comment on the case.

According to court documents, the problem began in May 2005 when Pearson became a judge and brought several suits for alteration to Custom Cleaners in Northeast Washington, a place he patronized regularly despite previous disagreements with the Chungs. A pair of pants from one suit was not ready when he requested it two days later, and was deemed to be missing.

Pearson asked the cleaners for the full price of the suit: more than $1,000.

But a week later, the Chungs said the pants had been found and refused to pay. That's when Pearson decided to sue.

Three settlement offers Manning said the cleaners made three settlement offers to Pearson. First they offered $3,000, then $4,600, then $12,000. But Pearson wasn't satisfied and expanded his calculations beyond one pair of pants.

Because Pearson no longer wanted to use his neighborhood dry cleaner, part of his lawsuit calls for $15,000 — the price to rent a car every weekend for 10 years to go to another business.

"He's somehow purporting that he has a constitutional right to a dry cleaner within four blocks of his apartment," Manning said.

But the bulk of the $65 million comes from Pearson's strict interpretation of D.C.'s consumer protection law, which fines violators $1,500 per violation, per day. According to court papers, Pearson added up 12 violations over 1,200 days, and then multiplied that by three defendants.

Much of Pearson's case rests on two signs that Custom Cleaners once had on its walls: "Satisfaction Guaranteed" and "Same Day Service."

Judge alleges fraud Based on Pearson's dissatisfaction and the delay in getting back the pants, he claims the signs amount to fraud.

Pearson has appointed himself to represent all customers affected by such signs, though D.C. Superior Court Judge Neal Kravitz, who will hear the June 11 trial, has said that this is a case about one plaintiff, and one pair of pants.

Sherman Joyce, president of the American Tort Association, has written a letter to the group of men who will decide this week whether to renew Pearson's 10-year appointment. Joyce is asking them to reconsider.

Support for the defendants And former National Labor Relations Board chief administrative law judge Melvin Welles wrote to The Washington Post to urge "any bar to which Mr. Pearson belongs to immediately disbar him and the District to remove him from his position as an administrative law judge."

"There has been a significant groundswell of support for the Chungs," said Manning, adding that plans for a defense fund Web site are in the works.

To the Chungs and their attorney, one of the most frustrating aspects of the case is their claim that Pearson's gray pants were found a week after Pearson dropped them off in 2005. They've been hanging in Manning's office for more than a year.

Pearson claims in court documents that his pants had blue and red pinstripes.

"They match his inseam measurements. The ticket on the pants match his receipt," Manning said.

This site does not contain sexually explicit images as defined in 18 U.S.C. 2256.
Accordingly, neither this site nor the contents contained herein are covered by the record-keeping provisions of 18 USC 2257(a)-(c).
Disclaimer: This website contains adult material. You must be over 18 to enter or 21 where applicable by law.All Members are over 18 years of age.Terms of Use|Privacy Policy